A trademark may not be registered if it is identical or similar to another's registered trademark or prior-filed trademark that is used on the same or similar goods or services, thus likely to confuse the relevant consumers, as specified in Article 23-I-(13) of the Trademark Act. In defining the scope of the term "relevant consumers", whether such term is confined to specific purchasers of the goods or covers general consumers has been quite controversial. The differences in the definition of this term may lead to different conclusions during the assessment of whether there is a likelihood of confusion.

In a trademark invalidation case regarding the use of a trademark for "bath tea bags," "medicated bath bags," "Chinese medicines," "ginseng" and "formula to relieve cough," Ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court in 2011 explains that "the so-called 'consumers' refer to individuals who have purchased and will purchase the relevant goods or services. There is no difference between 'general consumers' and 'relevant consumers,' as they both refer to individuals who intend to use the relevant goods or services. 'Consumers' protected under the Trademark Act, by no means, refer solely to individuals who have already acquired those goods or services. To the contrary, any and all potential or future consumers are protected under the Trademark Act".

The Supreme Administrative Court also points out the fact that unlike most western medications that only emphasize treatment only, many traditional Chinese medications or herbs, in addition to medical treatment, place emphasis on health care. In view of the fact that prevention is better than treatment and the fact that today's society places more focus on the overall health of an individual, it is quite common for the general public to choose traditional Chinese medicines or herbs over western medications. If Chinese medicines or herbs purchased by consumers are solely for the purpose of health care, they are usually readily available at any relevant Chinese herb pharmacies or sales outlets. Under such circumstances, trademarked goods could very likely be displayed at the same sales channels. Consequently, a substantial degree of similarity between the trademarks would likely confuse the relevant consumers. Moreover, except for "Chinese medicines" and "western medicines", the remaining contested goods, including "ginseng" and "formula to relieve cough", designated for the trademark at issue, which the general public could purchase for the purpose of maintaining health, are unlikely to gain a high degree of attention among the consumers prior to sales.